Ok, I know you will all accuse me of trolling, and this probably isnt a good first thread for me to do either but here it goes.

Why does every one say that Serena is the best player on the women's tour? I mean, isn't being a true great a balance of winning, staying healthy, fit and not getting injured every other tournament, or blaming your losses on nagging injuries that some how only started in that match you lost? Isn't this what Roger seemed to have (and still has it in a way) for so long for the better part of the last decade to have down pat? I simply see no way that you can say Serena is the best player on the WTA when she plays half the tournaments out of the year, wins one major and destroys the number 1 a few times, but then loses a match, blames it on an injury, then takes a few weeks to months off and comes back, dominates the tour, loses another match and does it all over again? In my opinion, she may be the best PLAYING woman on tour, but also the most INJURY PRONE and INCONSISTENT player on tour. Which, these two are very unbalanced and something that a true number one should be able to balance both of them and miss a max of 2 major tourneys a year (of course taking off time before the US Open swing like most top people do.).

I'm sorry folks, but I don't see it in Serena as the best on the WTA. She is simply too inconsistent to have earned the number one ranking. Sure, she dominates when she is well and fit, but gets an injury at least 4 times a year, and then her fans complain why she is not number one, but only plays the GS and a few major tournaments. Don't get me wrong, I like Serena, she is fun to watch, and quite the comic, but in my opinion should not be considered for a top 4 ranking with her work ethic and being as injury prone a she is.

In my opinion a true number one plays a good schedule, all 4 majors, nearly all the 1000s, several 500s, and 250s when he or she needs to keep match ready, AND WINS TOO! If you want my opinion, Sharapova, and Na are really the only ones that can fit a decent part of this criteria. Azarenka does sometimes, but she seems to be that "nagging" injury prone, those injuries that come and go within a match, not to mention that she gets a decent amount of walkovers and retirements as well. I hate how everyone says "Oh, well if Serena wasnt injured right now, she would have killed her and won the tournament, she is the true number one.", yeah maybe, she would have won the tournament and squashed the puny girl on the other side of the net, but she gets injured all the time! Not the qualities of a true number one.

Ok, I know you will all accuse me of trolling, and this probably isnt a good first thread for me to do either but here it goes.

Why does every one say that Serena is the best player on the women's tour? I mean, isn't being a true great a balance of winning, staying healthy, fit and not getting injured every other tournament, or blaming your losses on nagging injuries that some how only started in that match you lost? Isn't this what Roger seemed to have (and still has it in a way) for so long for the better part of the last decade to have down pat? I simply see no way that you can say Serena is the best player on the WTA when she plays half the tournaments out of the year, wins one major and destroys the number 1 a few times, but then loses a match, blames it on an injury, then takes a few weeks to months off and comes back, dominates the tour, loses another match and does it all over again? In my opinion, she may be the best PLAYING woman on tour, but also the most INJURY PRONE and INCONSISTENT player on tour. Which, these two are very unbalanced and something that a true number one should be able to balance both of them and miss a max of 2 major tourneys a year (of course taking off time before the US Open swing like most top people do.).

I'm sorry folks, but I don't see it in Serena as the best on the WTA. She is simply too inconsistent to have earned the number one ranking. Sure, she dominates when she is well and fit, but gets an injury at least 4 times a year, and then her fans complain why she is not number one, but only plays the GS and a few major tournaments. Don't get me wrong, I like Serena, she is fun to watch, and quite the comic, but in my opinion should not be considered for a top 4 ranking with her work ethic and being as injury prone a she is.

In my opinion a true number one plays a good schedule, all 4 majors, nearly all the 1000s, several 500s, and 250s when he or she needs to keep match ready, AND WINS TOO! If you want my opinion, Sharapova, and Na are really the only ones that can fit a decent part of this criteria. Azarenka does sometimes, but she seems to be that "nagging" injury prone, those injuries that come and go within a match, not to mention that she gets a decent amount of walkovers and retirements as well. I hate how everyone says "Oh, well if Serena wasnt injured right now, she would have killed her and won the tournament, she is the true number one.", yeah maybe, she would have won the tournament and squashed the puny girl on the other side of the net, but she gets injured all the time! Not the qualities of a true number one.

Serena is the best player on the woman's tour because she plays by far the highest level of tennis bar injury. Maybe she's not the "number 1 player" in terms of dedication to the tour, but she is far and above the best and most talented player.

Serena is the best player on the woman's tour because she plays by far the highest level of tennis bar injury. Maybe she's not the "number 1 player" in terms of dedication to the tour, but she is far and above the best and most talented player.

Click to expand...

Thats basically what I said in the above, shes the best when shes well, but a true number one can play their best without getting injured.

No one chooses whether or not they get injured injuries happen whether you like it or not. Anyone who played sport competitively should know that.

Click to expand...

Its a matter of your style of play. Take Fed for example, a very laid back style of play, not hard on his body, as well as him being good, therefor, reigns for quite some time, Nadal on the other hand, very hard on his body, better than Fed most of the time, but must rest a lot, and very injury prone, however, both these men are deserving of a no. 1 ranking as well as Djoko and Murray. All four great players and deserve the No.1 ranking more than the last. And there are women like this too.

Its a matter of your style of play. Take Fed for example, a very laid back style of play, not hard on his body, as well as him being good, therefor, reigns for quite some time, Nadal on the other hand, very hard on his body, better than Fed most of the time, but must rest a lot, and very injury prone, however, both these men are deserving of a no. 1 ranking as well as Djoko and Murray. All four great players and deserve the No.1 ranking more than the last. And there are women like this too.

Click to expand...

Now we are getting into the surface debate again. Federer came into tennis when tennis was being gradually shifted to slower courts. As you know, faster courts = less chance of injury.

Notice how the finals of the AO 2013 were influenced by the injury of the one player. The AO's surface is far more brutal on the body than before.

Thats basically what I said in the above, shes the best when shes well, but a true number one can play their best without getting injured.

Click to expand...

There's a difference between the number one player and the best player though. The number one player is an objective stat- who has accumulated the most points at tour events. The number one ranking is not the sole determinant of the BEST player though.